RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS AIR FORCE BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF MILITARY RECORDS IN THE MATTER OF: DOCKET NUMBERS: BC-2010-02097 COUNSEL: NONE HEARING DESIRED: NO _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT: His 7-day option be removed and he be allowed to request a retirement date of 1 June 2011. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT CONTENDS THAT: He was erroneously selected for reassignment with an Assignment Availability Code (AAC) of “37” (pending medical evaluation board) which identified him as non-worldwide qualified for a PCS assignment. If he had not been selected for reassignment, he would not have had to select a 7-day option to retire. In support of his appeal, the applicant provides a copy of his Notification of Selection for Reassignment. The applicant’s complete submission, with attachment, is at Exhibit A. _________________________________________________________________ STATEMENT OF FACTS: The applicant is a former member of the Regular Air Force who was progressively promoted to the grade of master sergeant (E-7). According to a Medical Evaluation Board (MEB) Narrative Summary, dated 11 August 2009, the applicant was referred to a Physical Evaluation Board (PEB) for Obstructive Sleep Apnea. On 19 August 2009, AFPC/DPMM (Medical Standards Branch) indicated the applicant had been found fit and returned to duty with an Assignment Limitation Code “C” and that all restrictions and holds imposed by the MEB/PEB process were removed on that date. On 7 April 2010, the applicant was notified that he was selected for an assignment. On 16 April 2010, the applicant indicated he elected to retire. The applicant was honorably released from active duty effective 31 October 2010 and retired effective 1 November 2010. He served 20 years, 11 months, and 29 days on active duty. _________________________________________________________________ AIR FORCE EVALUATION: AFPC/DPAA2 recommends denial. DPAA2 states that on 6 April 2010, the applicant was identified as the most eligible non-volunteer based on his Date Arrived Station (DAS) of 8 June 2000. He did have an AAC of “37” with an expiration date of June 2010. Their office coordinated with the Medical Standards Branch (standard operating procedure) to determine whether or not the MEB would return the applicant to duty. It was indicated that there was a high probability the applicant would be cleared to remain on active duty. On 7 April 2010, AFPC/DPMM sent a Record in Lieu Of (RILO) request to have the AAC “37” removed. DPAA2 indicates that based on the information collected, the applicant’s assignment selection followed all internal procedures and resulted in a good assignment match. The approved retirement based on the applicant’s 7-day option should remain in place. The complete DPAA2 evaluation is at Exhibit C. _________________________________________________________________ APPLICANT'S REVIEW OF AIR FORCE EVALUATION: A copy of the Air Force evaluation was forwarded to the applicant on 30 July 2010 for review and comment within 30 days (Exhibit D). As of this date, this office has received no response. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD CONCLUDES THAT: 1. The applicant has exhausted all remedies provided by existing law or regulations. 2. The application was timely filed. 3. Insufficient relevant evidence has been presented to demonstrate the existence of an error or an injustice. We took notice of the applicant's complete submission in judging the merits of the case; however, we agree with the opinion and recommendation of the Air Force office of primary responsibility and adopt its rationale as the basis for our conclusion the applicant has not been the victim of an error or injustice. Therefore, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, we find no basis to recommend granting the relief sought in this application. _________________________________________________________________ THE BOARD DETERMINES THAT: The applicant be notified that the evidence presented did not demonstrate the existence of material error or injustice; that the application was denied without a personal appearance; and that the application will only be reconsidered upon the submission of newly discovered relevant evidence not considered with this application. _________________________________________________________________ The following members of the Board considered AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-02097 in Executive Session on 23 February 2011, under the provisions of AFI 36-2603: The following documentary evidence was considered for AFBCMR Docket Number BC-2010-02097: Exhibit A. DD Form 149, dated 25 May 10, w/atch. Exhibit B. Applicant's Master Personnel Records. Exhibit C. Letter, AFPC/DPAA2, dated 30 Jun 10. Exhibit D. Letter, SAF/MRBR, dated 30 Jul 10.